Woman kicked back of constable

Press, 28 October 1981, Page 4

Woman kicked back of constable

A woman who kicked a constable in the back while he was struggling on the ground with another protester whom he was trying to arrest, at Lancaster Park on September 12, had gone beyond the legitimate use of force to assist a friend, said Judge Paterson in the District Court yesterday. He found the defendant, Colleen Joy Johanson, aged 33, an orchard worker (Mr M. J. Knowles) guilty of a charge of assaulting Constable B. M, Lamb in the execution of his duty. However, he discharged her without conviction, on payment of ?40 towards the cost of prosecution. She denied the offence.Sergeant B. D. Thompson prosecuted. Prosecution evidence was given that, after the main body of protesters had left the park on September 12, a group of about 30 returned

and surrounded a plainclothes detective. Some began attacking him. ■' . A number of police on duty went to his assistance and while arrests were being made the defendant, who wore boots, was seen to kick Constable Lamb in the loiter back, while the constable was struggling witth a protester he had arrested. He was later treated at hospital for contusions to the back. The defence case was that the defendant acted in selfdefence in applying force to the constable, as she believed on reasonable grounds that she had to do something to stop what'she believed was excessive force applied by the police officer to a friend ofhers. The defendant said in evidence that she saw a woman friend thrown fairly heavily to the ground, fallen on, and lunged at by a uniformed policeman.

She considered the force was extreme, and ran to assist her. The defendant said she was then dragged and thrown, and landed on the ground, She said she never struck the constable in the back. She never got a chance. She would have used force against the police. Her intention was to get her friend to her feet and get the police off her. The Judge held that the defendant went beyond the use of- reasonable force in what she believed was defence of her friend. He said, however, that he found it difficult to take the incident to the stage of entering a conviction. The use of force against her friend concerned her and her action might have been “an involuntary lunging of her foot.”